Defendant must prove his confessions were forced

ABU DHABI — It is not a simple allegation for a defendant in a court case to claim that his statements were taken by force during police or public prosecution interrogation. A defendant in such situations has to present his claims supported by a forensic doctor’s report.

By A Staff Reporter

  • Follow us on
  • google-news
  • whatsapp
  • telegram

Published: Sun 19 Mar 2006, 9:53 AM

Last updated: Wed 15 Nov 2023, 3:19 PM

But Abdul Rahman S. could not prove his claims. The man was accused of heroin and cocaine possession and abuse. He also had other sedatives in his possession. The public prosecution demanded that he be tried in accordance with Shariah and the anti-drugs law. The Abu Dhabi Shariah Court of First Instance sentenced the defendant in absentia to four years in jail and ordered the drugs confiscated.

The defendant was arrested by the police later and the judge ordered that he be produced in court after the previous verdict was dropped. The court again convicted him of heroin and cocaine possession and abuse as well as other drugs. He was sentenced to four years and the drugs were ordered to be destroyed. The defendant appealed against the verdict at the Abu Dhabi Shariah Appeal Court, which upheld the sentence. The defendant again contested the verdict and said his confessions were taken by force, giving a forensic doctor’s report that said he had a minor clot under the nail of a finger.


The Supreme Federal Court said the defendant had to prove his confessions were taken under duress and that was not verified by the defendant or by the forensic doctor’s report. The apex court, therefore, rejected the petition of the defendant.


More news from World